Note: We originally posted our NBA 2K18 review last month but the game was essentially broken, with a number of serious game-affecting bugs. It was so severe that we were unable to give the game a score, because we considered it incomplete. While we really enjoyed the game when it worked properly, our advice at the time was clear: hold fire. “You shouldn’t buy it until 2K Sports fixes its myriad of problems with a hefty update,” our review originally stated. That hefty update was finally released last week: later than is really acceptable, but now here nonetheless. So, with the Switch version’s physical release due next week, we’re finally able to bring you our final review and the definitive verdict on NBA 2K18.

It’s been five years since Nintendo fans have had an officially licensed ‘serious’ basketball game, the last being Wii U launch title NBA 2K13. 2K Sports’ initial support for the Wii U quickly simmered and the studio decided to focus its efforts on other formats, meaning its day one NBA 2K offering ended up being the only taste of slam dunkery Nintendo’s system received.

A lot has changed since then, however, and now 2K Sports is back for another crack at the Nintendo market. WWE 2K18’s due soon but before that we have the latest NBA 2K entry. And while it’s taken a while to get there, we’re finally happy with the results. NBA 2K18 easily provides the greatest basketball experience we’ve ever seen on a Nintendo system (yes, that even includes Mario Slam Basketball). The sheer attention to detail here is sensational.

Those familiar with the NBA 2K series will already be familiar with the sort of things we’re referring to, but those new to it will discover a level of presentation that eclipses every other sports game, FIFA included. Matches open with a (skippable) pre-game show hosted by a three-man panel, with countless pre-recorded chats that all sound genuine and not just read from a script. They’ll crack jokes, interrupt each other and generally act exactly like they would on the sort of real-life broadcast you’d expect to see on ABC or ESPN.

After this it’s down to courtside where you’ll be treated to one of a selection of pre-game routines. Sometimes you’ll see video footage of the city hosting the game, other times you’ll catch the end of the national anthem being sung, or maybe you’ll see the team mascot firing t-shirts into the crowd. This is all supported with the full TV broadcast experience with a full commentary team, sideline reporters, realistic TV-style camera angles, the whole nine yards. Those familiar with sports games may think we’re overreacting by listing all of this but until you’ve played a recent NBA 2K you can’t really appreciate just how incredibly authentic the entire thing feels before the tip-off even begins.

Once the action actually starts, controlling your team is a breeze regardless of your skill level. There’s great depth to the various types of shot, pass and tactical call you can call upon at any time, but how much you want to delve into that is entirely up to you. This game gives you the luxury of as much or as little control of the intricacies of basketball as you feel comfortable with. If you’re a relative novice and just want to go with the basic ‘B to pass, Y to shoot, A to steal’ controls, you’re more than welcome to. Things get significantly more complicated once you involve the shoulder buttons and the right stick – but you can happily play and win without ever having to worry about them.

Should you actually want to get stuck into that, the level of control you can eventually achieve with practice is ridiculous. Shimmy shots, dropsteps, post hops, hook drives, alley oops, Euro step layups... these and many more are available as and when you decide you want to push your game a bit further. Or not, it’s your call. This freedom of choice extends to the wide variety of games modes available, each of which are so packed they could easily constitute full games in their own right. For starters you’ve got MyGM: The Next Chapter, a story mode in which you play as a former NBA star whose career was ended short by a bad injury and is now a manager.

This mode plays like a standard career mode in something like FIFA, where you’re in charge of all the inner workings of the team: from training and tactics to trading and scouting, to even smaller things like jersey sales (all while still getting to control your team in each match, of course). If the story side of things doesn’t appeal to you there’s also MyLeague, which lets you play through up to 80 seasons, controlling anything from just one to all 32 teams. If you get properly invested in this it might keep you busy for the entire duration of the Switch’s life but it’s also the driest of the modes on offer, featuring little more than a schedule of matches.

Meanwhile, MyTeam is a fantasy team mode that’s clearly been inspired by FIFA’s Ultimate Team. You start with a handful of player cards and, over time, build up your team by winning and buying more cards until you’ve got a squad that can take on all-comers both off and online. Finally, if it’s more plot you’re looking for MyCareer gives you another story, but this time it’s one in which you control a single player rather than the whole team. This is one of the most popular NBA 2K modes every year and for good reason: as your player slowly builds his skills and stats you feel a real sense of attachment to him.

That said, MyCareer has a different storyline each year and 2K18’s is probably the weakest in a long time, partly because the jump from zero to hero is too swift this time. In previous games you had to prove yourself in training camps before getting drafted to a low-ranked team and slowly working your way up to something like the Cavs or Warriors. This time though the story begins with your player competing in a street basketball tournament and somehow making it to a pro NBA team without going through a draft or anything. Within less than an hour of MyCareer mode we were coming off the bench for the Toronto Raptors, which sort of undermined the whole idea of putting in hard work to reach the big time.

The mode also has a heavy emphasis on microtransactions. As you play you earn VC (virtual currency), which is spent on improving your stats and customising your character’s look. While you can earn VC through playing the game, you can of course also skip the grind and pay real money for it. While this won’t be new to anyone who’s been playing NBA 2K games on other systems over the past few years, do be aware that if you want to build your character naturally without spending any extra money you’re going to have to be in it for the long haul: this mode is a marathon, not a sprint.

Regardless, despite the constant spectre of microtransactions looming it’s still a great time, and when you combine all four main modes – MyGM, MyLeague, MyTeam and MyCareer – there are countless hundreds of hours of gameplay here that will keep you hooked, whether you’re an NBA die-hard or just a casual basketball fan looking for a sports game for their Switch.

Until recently NBA 2K18 was suffering from a number of huge game-breaking bugs. Our game saves were being reported as corrupt, cutscenes were playing at a snail’s pace, dialogue regularly sounded crackly and parts of the environment disappeared during MyCareer mode. Thankfully a large patch – albeit one that turned up far later than it should have – has removed the most serious ones. There are still some graphical glitches in there, with the likes of flickering shadows still present, but the big ones are finally gone and the game’s far better for it.

As a result, we’re now comfortable that we can finally recommend NBA 2K18. 2K Sports has delivered a game that comes fairly close to its performance on other systems (it runs at 30 frames per second instead of 60 but other than that it’s remarkably detailed), and unlike FIFA 18 it’s missing absolutely nothing in the Xbox One or PS4 modes (except for a face-scanning function which is apparently coming in a future patch). It’s still silly that it’s taken a full three weeks after the launch of the digital version to get to the stage that we can finally consider this game playable, and hopefully WWE 2K18 won’t suffer from a similarly calamitous launch.

Conclusion

For those who took our previous advice to hold fire until we were happy the game wasn’t a broken mess, you can finally pull the trigger: NBA 2K18 may not have been a great sports game at launch, but it’s certainly one now. This is effortlessly the best basketball game we've seen on a Nintendo system in years, and a must-have for Switch-owning sports fans.

Or, we could buy a cheaper, better version on another console. We don't have to be sympathetic or make excuses for them. There are plenty of decent Switch games and more to come. Just admit that this isn't one of them.

derek from cgrundertow made this observation about sports games. they've stopped trying to emulate the game itself and have become more sports BROADCAST simulators. they try to be the tv show, not the sport. having said that, i'd personally have a little less detail for more fluidity at a higher frame rate. maybe part of the patch can offer than option.

5 years since last officially licensed game on a nintendo system...wasnt NBA playgrounds officially licensed? That was only May. Even when playgrounds launched it didnt sound as broken as this version does, I'll stick to the silly over the top game

Also wow, before I started following this website, I had no idea that in 2017 people still cared so much about sports games. "hundreds of hours"??? I can't fathom spending 15 on a Basketball game, or any sports game. After I graduated high school in 2010 I was no longer forced to be around the jocks and sports nuts and this entire scene of people faded from my mind until recently when I found this website and started seeing all the posts about this game and FIFA.

To each their own I suppose. If so many people are invested in this game, then I do hope for your guy's sake that the game is patched quickly. I cannot imagine having been one of the die hard fans who bought the 150 dollar version only to find so many mistakes. I would be absolutely FURIOUS. 2K should be ashamed for releasing a game in such a state.

@Damo I worked in compliance testing for a couple of games companies. I imagine the words 'day one patch' were banded around a lot in this situation - a term I hated because it basically means the deadline (preorder money) is more important than the final product.

Depending on your stature in the industry you get away with more in Lot checks, indies wouldn't be allowed to patch it later for example (and wouldn't want to pay the patch fee either), while the Ubisofts and 2ks of the industry can come to an agreement where they agree to fix high priority issues with a patch.

I also fear Take Two and 2k Games consider the Switch a "no go" machine if this one sells poorly, blaming the fact that third parties can't succeed on Nintendo hardware instead of just admitting they rushed this one out on the field (erm...court?) to be able to release along side the other versions.

I will wait for the retail version, assuming they iron out stuff by October 5th (or push it back a few more weeks which seems wise at the moment).This WIP review also has me worried for the final quality of WWE 2k18...

Companies need to be penalised with poor scores for poorly performing games. Holding out for patches seems a little too forgiving. By all means update the review later, but the game should be graded on its current state, not withheld until some undetermined date in the future.

@Shiryu
Not sure what's your issue with people spending as much for a videogame. If I have that spare money and this is a must-buy game for me, I'll spend 150€ just so I can have Shaq and the goodies that comes with it instead of Kyrie Irving on the game icon/thumbnail/cover. Get over it.

@BensonUii It creates a dangerous precedent, one that tells the industry its ok to buy special editions of virtual currency at 3x the price of a regular game. I do not criticize those who do buy it (each one is free to do what they want with their money of course), I criticize those in marketing who decided that it is reasonable to price a game half the cost of a Switch.

@shani While I agree in principle, at least this way means people are more likely to actually read the review, rather than just look at a number and develop some knee-jerk reaction based on that. If the game remains the way it is, I'm sure a score will be given to reflect that, but if a patch is only a few days away, it may make sense to hold off on the pomp and circumstance of 'declaring a score' until then.

It's times like these when I really do appreciate Nintendo's commitment to quality when it comes to their first-party software. Sure, there have been a minor glitches in their titles over the years, but I've never had to play an utterly broken game from Nintendo proper.

I'm getting the physical which can be played from cart. I may not even download the update and just play offline (which also means skipping cutscenes AND has separate save system which means that might be solved too).

EA get buyers' money "pending". It's gone and in their pockets. Why isn't NintendoLife judging the final product that they decided to release ? Then if it improves, improve your judgement of it.

This "pending score" situation means studios can release unfinished broken pieces of gaming, cash in the preorders and give people a bad initial experience... and get away with it, with the promess of a patch, perhaps maybe coming later. That's crazy !

@Tibob
This is a Take Two game not EA. And I applaud EA for making the right approach in custom-building FIFA 18 on the Switch, achieving 60fps and decent graphics (judging on previews), even if missing some minor contents than Take Two's approach of straight up porting NBA 2K18.

It used to be that gaming publications would review games harshly for having game breaking bugs at release time. This was done so as not to encourage publishers to be comfortable with releasing a broken version of their game, then (maybe) fixing it later with future revisions. It's the same way with a lot of things in life- first impressions are important. Being lenient and giving a "Score Pending" to give a company carte blanche to release their products before fixing their problems, rather than giving an initial accurate score and updating it later once it has been fixed, provides respite for a troubling precedent. If enough review sites do this, then there becomes absolutely zero penalty for publishers (especially the larger, richer ones) to completely take advantage of the opportunity, and regularly release their games early in a broken state. After all, they can always just fix their product's mistakes later with no repercussions whatsoever, right?

Imagine if every piece of tech or software product could be allowed that kind of leeway on a regular basis. Is that really the kind of culture you want to promote?

@Anti-MatterThat's not really the point here though is it?On the whole I prefer more arcade/stylized sports games myself but it's silly to suggest that the leading, officially franchised sports titles should take that approach. You have a bad habit of quickly dismissing something on the basis of personal preference to suggest a "better" alternative even if it makes absolutely no sense in the context.

@BensonUiiI canceled mine. Not even for a malicious reason, I did get skittish about whether a patch would be out at release, and with FIFA and Mario, I just didn't see the point in buying this day 1 without KNOWING it was going to be patched.

I am reminded of how a friend tried to get through an essay by randomly writing all the things he could think of that he learned. When it came back he didn't even get a score all that was written was nonsense not even worth scoring.

As I see it, it is calling it a buggy mess that is not even worth scoring. Yes they did say they would change it if it is patched. But how I see it in context is that it is not worth even scoring as is and as such not even worth buying. Essentially less than zero.

@Anti-Matter That is a horrible idea. Many spots fans actually like their games to be as close to a real life simulation as possible. There are other games (such as NBA Playgrounds) that fits your style perfectly.

If you read the review, it's actually more harsh than a low score. It explicitly states, "Do not buy this game" (right now, or maybe ever). Based on how deep the actual gameplay is, if the reviewer was forced to apply a score at this junction; it may have scored better than the game actually deserves in its current state.

@flapjack-ashleyWell...I'm tired to see OMG Ultra HD Realistic graphics.Not interested anymore. Indeed it is Perfect, But sometime Perfect is Boring (Quote from Tyra Banks, host of America's Next Top Model)

I guess I can choose other games. Cartoonish style are suitable for me.

I applaud you guys for saying hold off on buying, but you really do need to attach a score to this. They shipped it this way, they deserve the bad score if it ships broken. If they care so much about Metacritic, they should've fixed things before launch.

PC Gamer gave Dishonored 2 the same lieniency when it shipped broken on PC, and it really disappointed me to the point that I barely visit that site anymore. That's not a threat, but it is the reality if you're going to start holding review scores to give devs a grace period to fix things that were unacceptable to ship with in the first place.

I for one understand the score pending situation, but only at this particular time. A fine line needs to be walked here. Devs are effectively in uncharted waters with Switch, especially with big AAA franchises like this one. I would like to encourage them to look positively to the future, rather than having the bean counters decide it isn't worth the hassle and merely give us warmed over mobile games like RBI.

It's like praising a child for what they have done right, explaining to them what they have done wrong, and having the leniency and patience to let them correct themselves and improve. For me the content of the review does all of this.

Having said that, this pending score policy is acceptable to me in these early days, but as the system matures it should not continue. You can only give them so much rope, after all.

OFF WITH ITS HEAD! OFF WITH ITS HEAD!
KILL THE PIG! CUT HIS THROAT! BASH HIM IN!

Grow up, people. Just because you need to get your schadenfreude ASAP doesn't mean that they should slap a score on the game right this second.

I suspect that the score is pending because on sites like Metacritic, you can change the score, but it'll be stuck on the game's Metascore like a crimson letter. If anything, I applaud not being impulsive with this review. Yes, it has problems, but I expect them to be fixed, and I'm glad that they're not letting the problems present now affect the game's long-term potential for success.

This is the first part of NintendoLife's handling of NBA 2K18 that I can say I approve of. So, kudos for that, I guess. It's nice to see this site not jump on the negativity bandwagon at what may be the most crucial part of the process.

EDIT: Oh, and I've done myself the favor of Ignoring all the people calling for this game's head in the comments section, so when I don't reply to anyone insisting we need to put the heads of any game that doesn't launch in perfect shape on a stick, that'll be why. On the plus side, it did allow me to quickly identify the people whose opinions I don't want to read again in the future, which was nice!

@theberrage The animations during graphics transitions are sometimes still a big janky and laggy. I only noticed it during actual gameplay a few times, and usually when a graphics overlay flew by, and it was for a second or two; never at a critical moment. The halftime and pregame portions of the game (which I couldn't care less about) are about the same as the Wii U version as well. So, all told, I think they're about the same performance-wise.

Don't hope this review will put people off from buying this game, because truth is it really plays like a dream when you get down to the bare essentials, which is: playing basketball. The issues are of the technical kind and can (and should) be fixed.

One more voice for the chorus - a game should get a score based on what is released. If they fix the game later on, the score can be adjusted. If they don't, let them suffer the consequences. Far too many companies are overly complacent these days about fixing games after they release, and withholding scores on reviews makes them even more so.

Good lord what a mess. Crazy that Nintendo showcased this during the initial Switch reveal. Granted, they were still working on it then, but they desperately needed to delay this game it sounds like. How could a game get the greenlight with such problems?

@BustedUpBiker
The "early bird" excuse was fini in the first three months, when Playground, BotW, or Bomberman came out and had a patch right away.
We're six months in, so what are they gonna achieve in terms of stability in the next days/weeks that they couldn't figure out all these months ?

Definitely waiting on retail .. should be a fix for the issues by then . That being said , releasing a game that requires the memory investment this one does ? Should not be polish / performance issues like this .

@MarioPhDWe're not hating on the game, we're only trying to keep things fair. Too bad it has to impact a game you feel so strongly about, but there's no way around it : the product that one can buy today is a broken one. Defending this practice today is encouraging studios to do it again tomorrow.

@MoonKnight7 I already have a PS4,I meant it would be more appealing on the Switch. The hours to invest in this franchise gets insane and MHW only being limited to a home console,myself,I'll find it hard to invest the hours to make any decent progress. I'll probably hit G-Rank around the year 2020

Hey folks, I wrote this review. Just want to give a bit of feedback on why the team and I decided we should hold back on a score just now.

This isn't a situation where there are a few graphical glitches or annoying niggles that would mean a patch would improve the game but not completely transform it.

This is a situation where the game is flat out broken to an extent that this clearly wasn't what 2K expected to happen when the game launched.

More importantly, 2K has already been informing customers that it's working on a patch, and Xbox One and PS4 owners have already received one.

As such, there's a clear possibility that in a day or two's time some of these issues will already be fixed.

By not giving the game a score, the intention is not to defend 2K or help them out. Like it or not, we now live in a time where day one patches are commonplace and this is just a particularly bad example: one in which there wasn't even a patch ready for day one.

We also now live in a time where the first score a publication gives is broadcast all over the internet: if I'd given the game a 3 or 4 then that's the score that would be getting reported in forums, discussed in this comments thread and logged on Metacritic.

Even if a patch was to be released the following day and the score was then changed to an 8 (which is what I'd be likely to give it if the issues were fixed), it would still be a 3 or 4 on Metacritic and the news of the score change wouldn't travel anywhere near as far as the news of the initial score.

I appreciate that scores are a great talking point but I strongly recommend you read the 1700 words I've written instead for now. The score will come soon but the words should (hopefully) do a much better job of telling you what I think about the game.

@Tibob I'd say BotW was years in development and Nintendo are known for their refined releases. Playgrounds and Bomberman were considerably less ambitious IMHO.

This is a huge game, with features on a parity with every other platform. It seems rough around the edges, but from what I know the core gameplay is great. Personally I'd class it as an experiment for 2K - they're testing the waters here - and such a complex project no doubt had their Switch team working long hours to meet the release date at all.

This game needs a score. As much as I want sports games on the Switch, the no score is just going to make me not buy it. Sure the patch will come and it would seem to be unplayable, but putting out a game that is not complete is just overall bad for business. If I purchased this game and I could not play it. I would want a refund. I don't think you can get a refund on a game. I might be wrong. My point is I would be seriously P.O.ed and not even bother playing it no more because I would have moved on to another game.

everything I'm reading on metacritic is that VC (virtual currency) is out of control and the game is now built on micro-transactions and even things in the game (like your agent) will take that currency from you so you have to earn more incredibly slowly in game or buy it from 2k for real money. Hm..... haven't played it myself but that doesnt' sound good.

@BensonUii what baffles me (long time 2k fan since the first dreamcast game) is how early they release the games before the start of the nba season. They could use that time to fix most issues before release.

@BensonUii it's almost laughable that they call it a physical version considering how little is stored on the card. But yes lets hope they fix it before the physical release, and just add that patch to the sizable download.

So glad you didn't score it as a score now will forever be seen as a bad game. Hopefully 2K can get their act together fast and remedy this situation.

I've been very critical if the way this game was handled but I still want it. I believe both Nintendo and 2k are to blame as I believe 2k past on too much extra memory for the retail version. They cheaped out to me but Nintendo is also responsible for lack of storage and not having the foresight to see memory being a big problem.

@Anti-Matter why is that the solution to the drama? especially considering the major issue with this game currently is a software one. The file size debacle is a mess, but this won't be solved with chibi/cartoon design (see: NBA Playgrounds).

I don't get why so many people are determined and upset that there isn't a final score on this game. I get that it should be graded as the game has been released, but for the most part, it has been. The review is very detailed in pointing out it's drawbacks. It is almost like people don't read the review at all and just get mad there is no final score to see when they scroll past the review itself.

@scully1888 You're right, you're not defending 2K, you're doing something much worse; giving them and any other dev the ability to ship something broken and not suffer any consequence on this site as long as they can claim they can fix it. Day one patches are commonplace, but they didn't even have one ready, because they somehow missed something like this during QA? What a line of BS.

It's a bad, bad precedent to set, and personally I've lost a good deal of respect for this site and it's writers for taking this route.

This is truly an amazing game and I’m confident that 2k will fix the save corruption and audio glitches fairly fast. The gameplay and visuals are amazing! I dock in my garage and play exhibition matches with my kids and neighbors. I play myTeam and myCareer when away from home. I’ve had save file corruption twice, but haven’t appeared to have lost any progress. I’ve avoided another corruption by making sure I only exit a game after the save icon completes and I exit to main menu.

@scully1888I read with interest your rationale for not giving a score for a game which is broken. There are no excuses for releasing a game which is not fit for release, EA should have delayed the game until the major faults were fixed. We are not talking about minor faults which we all accept (reluctantly) will be patched soon after release.So what if Metacritic and other sites will report low scores 'for ever'....maybe that it the kick up the bottom that EA needs to change its attitude to releasing games that have not been tested & fixed properly. When I buy a car I expect it to be working on Day 1, not have an missing dashboard or suspension and just accept I'll have to wait weeks or months for it to be sorted out.I note that other games were given low scores because of major faults.....Troll & I received a score of 4/10 mainly because of that. In the past this site has regularly (and rightly) given low scores to unfinished games, usually by small developers. Why should you give EA free pass to mediocrity but deny smaller developers that same chance to fix faults?If the game was an eshop purchase of a few quid, then there wouldn't be such an outcry about withholding a score, but EA expect mugs to pay between £60 & £120 for a game which any reputable developer/publisher would have delayed to at least get the game playable.

I believe this game should be scored (poorly) anyway, with perhaps an updated review in the future.

As for goodness sake, it's a released game and it should be treated as such. I'm so over these companies releasing broken games only to fix them later. Good luck Nintendo themselves are still making an effort to have games working before release.

@scully1888 It sounds like Metacritic is the main hangup point, seemingly taking precedence over the integrity of the initial state of the product. Why not give it a temporary score according to what exists for people to buy on day 1, don't immediately submit that score to Metacritic, and give an ultimatum for patching the game before a certain date/time? Then, change the score if those conditions are met, and then submit it to Metacritic accordingly?

Nevertheless, your explanation is fair, and the worded content of the review speaks for itself. I just think publishers (especially larger ones) shouldn't be able to settle in too comfortably. I can tell with your explanation that's not intentional, but if you're lenient with one, you have to be lenient with everyone to be fair. Every single game that ships incomplete like this would also have to get a free pass from critical perception.

I had this game pre-ordered at Best Buy a few weeks back but cancelled it due to the physical delay. I was thinking about spending the extra cash on the digital version but with the 5GB save files (still baffles me) and the save file corruption bug I'm definitely skipping out for now. If 2K addresses those two issues, perhaps I'll consider the physical release again.

@Slaz@Zingo I agree completely. Software testing is a vital part of game development and software development in general. I'm all for updating reviews in the future, but refusing to score it now is silly. It's released, it's bugged, that's 2K's fault.

@Drommajin the switch version is around 25GB while the PS4 and Xbox one are like 40 odd GB.. compression is not the problem. I mean how low do you expect 2K to go. Do you want to go down the vita route. Huge compression with long loading times.

@Jamotello Yes! I can't stand feeling like I'm sitting watching nonsense for half the time. I want to have a contest against the computer or with a buddy. There needs to be a Play the Game mode, where you can actually just play the game.

@kobashi100 I hadn't thought about this until the other day... NBA2K18 loads very quickly. If a lack of compression is the reason, I say no problem. I don't have an issue even with SD cards. My only real issue is the 5GB save file and that you can't put that onto an SD card.

@airsonist I've been playing NBA2k18 and I think it's great. I have no interest in MyTeam, MyLeague, etc., etc. I buy a sports game so that I can load up two teams and play a match. In that respect, I wish they'd cancel all the resources they put into all the cutscenes at least... a league simulator is fine, just keep it more stat based. They try and do too much, and it bogs down development.

So far I haven't experienced any problems playing a game... maybe I will at some point, but so far it's a lot of fun.

@shani Yeah, I'm in two minds about the correct approach, as it's really not acceptable to release a broken product to the mass market.

However, I think if I were the reviewer, I'd have adopted the same approach (telling the reader to avoid the game for the time being, while leaving the score as 'pending'). The main reason being that I'd find it so difficult to think of appropriate number to label the game with, as it would drastically change depending on what element of the game I was thinking of.

If the game were fundamentally bad and broken, I'd have much fewer qualms; just slap a meagre number on it, label it a broken failure, and move on.

But if I had a game I was largely impressed with, I'd feel much less certain about how to factor its current technical failings into the score appropriately. Do you give it a 3, on account of the major hiccups? Do you give it an 8, in a charitable effort to review the game underneath all that; one which clearly shows an impressive level and attention to detail and depth in its core gameplay? Do you pluck a 5 out of the air because it lies somewhere between those two extremes?

Any score I gave it, I'd probably feel uncomfortable about, as it might send the wrong message to the consumer. A low score wouldn't account for the fact that the game is itself got a lot going for it, and is fundamentally - or should be a good game. More importantly, one with may well be soon so long as the deep teething issues get patched in the period after launch. A high score would essentially be recommending faulty goods, which is irresponsible. A middling score wouldn't make either of these points clear. There's some reasoning in simply explaining the current 'state of play' to the reader, and holding off on the whole score thing for a couple of days or so. After all, people release entire reviews days and weeks after launch (think of all the furore when Jim Sterling arrived late to the Breath of the Wild party with a less than glowing review). Putting out a review without the number immediately at least gives the reader some basic, useful information about the game to inform their decisions without completely severing all interest in the game.

But as I say, I'm basically on the fence. It it were me, I'd probably go down the 'give it a 5' route, and then get shouted down in the comments section because the faults with "the game make it unplayable and therefore deserving of a 2 or a 3". I think there's probably no non-divisive approach to reviewing the game, to be honest.

@wiggleronacid With the physical version only having a small part of the game on the cart, for me the only reason I'm keeping my physical preorder is because I got a great deal on it during E3. I want a second copy for when I get my son a switch. But I think that other than that, the digital is the way to go on this. It isn't going to have much trade in value in a year, and it will require patching anyways to deal with these bugs.

Personally, I buy a sports game to load it up and play a match, not all the extra stuff... I've found it to be great and certainly not worth missing... there aren't other options for a game like this right now on the switch.

@scully1888@RedMageLanakyn@ThumperUK@Tibob Maybe they should do something called a 'Preliminary Report'. This is different than a Preview which often seems to be a fluffy piece that sometimes seems to be paid for by the maker of the game(I don't mean here on NintendoLife). NintendoLife does not need to review the game until they are ready to... they sometimes wait days or weeks after a game comes out to do a review. However, we all want to know ASAP to help us make a purchase. They put out this unscored review which gives people an important heads up, while still holding off on their score until they are ready to give it...

Personally, I think the game is great and worth getting even today. I have no interest in many of the modes that seem most broken. A low score would do a disservice to a good game.

Sounds like the game in general hit the "go gold" deadline with a load of stuff broken and they just had to run with it and fix it later. Shame to those buying on launch but that's the unfortunate way games are made these days.

Re: the not-scoring thing; imo it's completely fair. As is the current build does not give a fair representation of the game, so it is acceptable to wait until the game-breaking issues are fixed. There have been instances of games getting good reviews then being completely broken on release, releasing a lot of fan complaints on why it was rated so highly when it was fundamentally broken. Likewise if you give it a negative score that'll give the game an unfair bad rep that will stick around and potentially unfairly lose sales.

It's nice to see this game hold of graphically compared to the XBone and PS4 versions... but the game doesn't sound very good. I already suspected something was off when I saw the 'mostly negative' reception on Steam.

Welp, we still have FIFA and WWE to save the sports games on the Switch. Or we can wait for another Mario sports title.

@Hughesy I don't want to have to wait another month to play what i'm playing...load up two teams and play a game. Maybe they should have sold the game for $20 with just basic modes, and then charge extra to get other modes as they release them after they fix them.

@Hughesy It may have been released as such, but it is not. So NL are not even dignifying it with a score. Ideally there would be no numeric scoring systems so people would read reviews in full, but this is the next best thing.

@8itmap_k1d I think a number scoring system is essential. I don't know as much about games as these professionals do, and many games I get I don't get anywhere close to finishing. Talking about things for pages and pages is fine, but the scores help to give a better sense of where the game is at. I prefer it when a site gives subscores for graphics/gameplay/etc. That helps even more.

@Maxz Huh, hadn't thought about that, but now I see how that would've been problematic.

My initial idea was to either:

a) take the score I would give if it was polished and decrease that score by two or so.
b) give it a score of 1/10 as a symbolic punishment (because it's unplayable/unenjoyable) until the issue is fixed

But after reading your post, I think not giving it a score is in fact the best way to handle it. The missing score immediately grabs the reader's attention (and could even be read as a temporary 0/10 score) while avoiding all the issues you mentioned.

Tbh I don't play the career mode of these kind of sports games (except for Football manager, of course) but only friendly matches against friends, so the bugs wouldn't have affected me that much.

It's kind of amusing that the habit of "open the review, ignore the review itself, scroll down to the score and throw a hissy fit about it in the comments" persists even when there is no score.

Give a game a 9 and it's another sign of NL's unrelenting Switch bias. Give a game a 7 or an 8 and it's 'disappointing', 'skippable', and possibly even just 'trash'. Leave a score pending for a couple of days until it becomes clear how many of the technical issues will be present in the product reaching most consumers, and you've commited a mortal sin.

To be clear, some people have written very level headed comments arguing for the game to be scored immediately along with the review, with the point that if games are consistently released as half-baked products without penalty, then the issue is only likely to grow worse.

But others are simply baying for blood, with all pragmatic arguments for delaying the numerical verdict ignored in favour of gnashing teeth and stamping boots - as though getting a score on (say) Friday as opposed to Tuesday is the difference between heaven and hell.

"But I need to know now!", you might say, "I need a score to inform my purchases! How am I meant to know whether to buy the game without a score to inform me!?". Well, try reading the review itself - all however many thousand words of it. It explicitly states to hold off purchasing the game until it becomes clear how permanent the technical issues are. There's your answer: Do not buy now. Wait. Look back at the review in a few days. And if you end up regretting buying the game because you couldn't be bothered to read a single, unscored page of writing about it, then you're a fool. If you can put however much time and money into a game to discover its problems, but can't read a written piece telling you about them, then... well, insert snarky comment here.

A review is essentially a recommendation to potential consumers. This duty comes before any moral pressure to deliver retribution unto publishers who run behind schedule with bug fixing. Should publishers fail in doing this, the consumer should of course be warned (as indeed they are, repeatedly, in the above text). However, 'punishment' of the developers (e.g. by giving them the score equivalent of a middle finger) comes second to accurately informing the consumer about the product in question. Slapping a low score onto the game would likely put off some potential customers forever, many of whom may have deeply enjoyed the game had they bought it only a few days after release. Giving it a high score would be recommending a faulty product, even if the game underneath would otherwise deserve it, which is misleading and disingenuous. Scoring somewhere in the middle doesn't really address the game's fundamental quality, or sufficiently warn consumers about its problems (though may have to suffice as a final score if the problems remain unaddressed).

One would therefore assume the most consumer-friendly option would be to leave something like "watch this space" in the score section, so that readers may check back in a few days to see if the issues have been resolved, and in the mean time still have a very thorough and clearly explained review of the current product to read though. This seems entirely pragmatic, but is apparently only more evidence of NL's utter depravity.

I'm not saying there aren't good reasons for giving the game an initial score on release, but please consider some better reasons for not doing so than just "Ninendo Life are evil".

I literally posted over on IGN on Saturday saying the same things as this review. I almost got ran out of the comment section, getting accused of being a Sony troll and told to STFU. The ACTUAL game is good, but it's broken on the Switch.

I'm just very very disappointed. There is no way 2K didn't know about the cutscene issue beforehand. There has been absolute and complete radio silence on every major video game website about these issues. That to me is very suspect and disheartening, because there is no way they don't know about these issues either.

The problem indeed is that the game quality is abover average. Therefore the reviewer feels the need to wait.

Take for example an excellent game like Breath of The Wild or perhaps the upcoming Mario Oddissey. Suppose for a moment that as amazing as they were, came with some strong heavy bugs, particularly one that consistently erases your whole progress but thankfully in today times, easily fixable with an update...and yes, Nintendo big brands are no stranger to those kind of bugs , Skyward Sword, Majora's Mask 3D and Pokemon to name a few had both in the past mild examples of file erasing bugs that needed correction with updates.

If that had been the case, you can trust me, you would have waited too...unless of course you had either a vendetta against the developer, or actually thought the Zelda or Mario were horrible games to begin with.

@Maxz - So incredibly rational, reasonable and well stated. I doubt your message will reach the intended audience as you used more than a couple words, and none of them were angry words; but I enjoyed your last post. I guess "skip the review/glance at the score/post a hot take in the comments" is as much a sign of the times as five gig save files and day one (or two, or three, or...) game fixing patches.

It is actually very good can't see why you don't give it a score - just to see and play NBA 2K on my switch handheld and on the go is fantastic the glitches are only minor in my experience and don't detract from the excellent gameplay

@Maxz They're damned if they do score it and damned if they don't here...no matter what they score it, people will be up in arms telling them they're wrong, that the score is way too high, don't score it and they'll say "damn it what's the score?"

I hope they fix this game. I'm not into it at all but what I have seen of it looks great if you're into basketball. I saw a video of it in tabletop mode and it looks pretty special on that little screen. I live in the UK. Basketball is about as big as pearl diving over here.

There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of a review scores. Review scores do not serve the purpose of rewarding publishers or developers for creating a good game and releasing it in a timely fashion without any major issues, nor do review scores exist to punish game makers for releasing a substandard product, effectively crippling its sales. Reviews, text and score included, are for consumers--gamers! Their purpose is to inform so that all of us can decide whether we want to purchase a given game, or save our money. Believe it or not, there are prospective buyers of this game out there that care about seeing a score which tells them whether or not this game is worth their time and money. Many commenters on this article would do well to think of those individuals rather than of 2K and what responsibility Nintendo Life has to ensure that it "pays for its crime."

I've always been an NBA fan but have become a diehard fan recently. I watch every game from my team, am constantly on forums, I know all the players pretty extensively and keep up with different strategies and gms and rumors and all that. My team has a great and crafty GM so the GM simulation thing really appealed to me. I decided to dive in as a way to get pumped up for the upcoming season.

I hadn't played a good simulator like this in a while. I'm fairly good at most games. But the controls on this, although extensive, are just clunky. Pick and rolls are the butter of the modern NBA and yet it's extremely awkward to use. I played as some of the best pick and roll combos in the league and it was still not even close to smooth. The inclusion of the right stick having similar motions do different things is awkward as well. Several times my player would stop and shoot a floater or almost post up move but I wanted them to keep going and shoot a layup. Basic things like layups just feel not right to play as.

The key to all games are the gameplay. It has to be fun or else story, characters and all that are meaningless. The MyGM thing is OK, the league thing is huge, but overall playing the actual game can be kind of fun but is far from as polished and good as it should be. The controls need serious work.

Big time Publishers and Companies have investors to answer to and deadlines to meet which can cost a whole lot of money when missed. They get the product to a reasonable working state and then get it out the door and plan fixes later. I am not excusing the behavior but in the end for the people working on these games it is sometimes literally their necks on the block to not delay past the release date which would then see them incur all the costs associated with that scenario. If you have ever done a major programming project or hell any big project in general, things usually go wrong and delays happen even when you give 100%. From what I have seen many of the people who actually bought the game are actually enjoying it. The most bitter complainers did not purchase it and more hilariously some of them never planned to.

A fair review. We'll wait and see if they get these bugs fixed promptly, then we'll decide if it's worth the cost of the game, as well as the cost of a micro SD card that it is forcing us to buy. If it's worth it, then hooray for everyone. If it's not... well, then all the best to them...

@coolaggroWho's your team, if you don't mind me asking? I'm a Raps fan and always thought that Masai was fairly 'crafty.' I'm interested to see if DeMar, Lowry, JV and the rest of the team are well represented in this game. I'm really on the fence about whether or not to pick this one up and that might clinch it for me.

+1 for not giving it a score yet. Hopefully 2K puts out the patch soon, which I'm sure they will. Seems like a solid basketball title despite the early hiccups. That's one of many reasons why I can appreciate Nintendo exclusives - Nintendo almost never releases a game that has a game breaking bug or has some glitch that puts a strain on the enjoyment of the game.

@FlashFan207 The Raps wouldn't let me trade for Valun so I guess they rate him highly enough! I'm a Rockets fan but have become a Raptors fan since you have had so many ex-Rockets over the year. I love Lowry and love DeRozan too. I always wish the Raps could get over Lebron, been sad they haven't been able to.

If you like NBA 2K games, this is a great buy. But the controls for me just didn't feel good enough. Capela and CP3 and Harden are some of the best PNR guys in the game, they make it look smooth as butter. Yet the game makes it feel so clunky because you have to hold down the bumper button for so long (L). One of a few complaints I have, shooting being the other really large one.

@PtM To clarify, my argument was not against the concept of scores, nor really in favour of "withholding judgement" in any absolute sense; the above review does judge the game pretty comprehensively (it's not exactly short), with the only omission being the score itself. So, I suppose it's partly to do with reserving judgement, at least with regards to the final numeral at the end.

My main argument was simply that, in the interests of recommending the game to a potential audience (i.e. the entire point of a review), there is a lot of sense in waiting until you know whether the main problems with it will persist when most consumers actually get their hands on it.

If you definitively pan a game because it was flawed for the first couple of days in it was on shelves, you're doing a disservice to everyone who may have been faced with a commendable product from day 3 (say) onwards. Of course, there's only so far you can take this logic; it's unreasonable to expect games to be rereviewed after every patch, or left unscored until the reviewer knows the final patch has been sent, but in certain cases it may well be warranted.

Ultimately, having to wait a couple of days for a score is a small price to pay for knowing that the given score accurately represents the product you're buying.

So yeah, I don't have a problem with scores. I mean, I wish people weren't as hung up on them, but they can certainly play a helpful role in summarising the above passages, and also in acting as quick references for whether a game is worth purchasing, which is useful when comparing games en masse.

My main point was about when scores are given. If you can give a score you're confident in on Friday, but not Tuesday, then give the score on Friday. In the meantime, give a solid and insightful piece of writing informing people of the current circumstances so that people don't buy the game completely uninformed. The whole review could have been delayed for a few days if necessary, but that would have helped no-one.

Rather than being, "against scores", I have more of a problem with many people's disregard for the actual writing that comes above the score, and constitutes the actual 'review' itself. There's an entire 1700 word piexe of writing here that explains everything you'd need to know about the game in its current state. And yet people are ignoring it and making a fuss about the number (or lack of it).

...I mean, I don't really care for Basketball sims, but I'm obligated to say this considering they how often big publishers release buggy games like this, assuming that people who buy it will have ready access to the internet to download the patches they put out later down the line. More than a little anti-consumer in my opinion.

The irony above all ironies is that Chris Scullion had a bit on his podcast last week about how gamers today tend to ignore lengthy reviews, skip right to the score, and start flinging poop in the comments. If he retires from journalism after this review to pursue a laid back career pouring pints, I wouldn't even blame him.

@gatorboi352That's why I buy so many games day one. Not all games get the $10 pre-order reward offer like this one did, but Mario Odyssey did and FIFA 18 did, so all of them come to $34 after the rewards back for using CC, being Elite Plus member and double rewards as MyBestBuy member for any gaming purchases.

But even games that don't get that special offer still come to around $45 day one.

Meh... Can't stand sports games(save for the over the top cartoony ones like nba jam and some wrestling games) so this is no big loss to me. Having strong 3rd party support back again after the years of Wii U, but I'm waiting for stuff like Doom and Wolfenstein 2 now.

This is a poor showing, so first we find that PHYSICAL will not be completely urm PHYSICAL, which is a slap in the face to the consumer, as generally speaking switch games simply are more expensive for the most part, so what an extra 5 - 10 pounds would destroy sales, if they had put the whole game on cart 5GB save file would be manageable by ALL switch owners without needing an SD card.

Will have to see how quickly the path comes out, and how large that will end up making the game.
Id say this actually explains why we don't have a PHYSICAL release yet, they new this was broken ... and did not want to risk a cartridge recall.

Anybody who owns a Switch or knows anything about it, or indeed has a basic knowledge of video game technology, knows there are going to be sacrifices on games like this compared to the PS4. It isn't as powerful, but has other benefits.

It seems to be those who don't own one still fascinated by this. Owners are aware and made their peace with it long ago.

@Shiryu They have been selling them for years, incluidng GTA V and Call of Duty. My son asked me 45 dollars to have all the DLC and about 20 for some sort of currency (bubble gum or candy, can't remember) and new fun. I told him, yes, but it meant no new games for 3 months.

@electrolite77 I've played them regularly for 20 years. But after I left high school 7 years ago I no long was forced to be around people who play sports games. And even then sports games always struck me as a joke.

@Shiryu Of course. Call of Duty is such a time-sinker that if you can have 3-8 friends online, that's all you need. Also, he doesn't get to play weekdays when school is in, so he doesn't worn out for playing too much.

I think that asking 60 bucks for NBA 2K18 is a steal, barring the bugs, even for casual basketball fans. I can see basketball nuts playing 150 for this game easily, just like in any other platform. I've seen guys spending 150 in Candy Crush or Pokemon Shuffle!

@maceng I have seen this industry grow from bedrooms coders in the 80's to today multinational corporations.It is probably because I was not born into this current gen that I simply will never be comfortable with micro-transactions and paying real money for virtual currency. It is in a way dissimulated gambling, and you end up buying a game for a fixed price that youll quickly raise in a long run with zero effort to the producer/publisher and quite a punch in the family budget. The crazy days of the industry we live in...

Looks like a great game and hope they fix the bugs so I can buy it. Last 2K NBA I played seriously was on the Wii and the motion control was pretty cool. But at this point it would be stupid to buy this game on another console when you have a same experience portable game. Portable is always better and more fun.

I think that NintendoLife dropped the ball on this one. If this was not NBA 2k18 and 2K we were talking about, they would've slammed it with a 2 or 3.
Given it's who it is, they are just not giving a score so that everyone can buy it, and later on give it a proper review chance... The entire grinding and VC barrier cannot be changed with a patch.

He did leave a score, in the comment section. He'd most likely grade it an 8 without the tech issues... Even better would be if everyone did like you and read the review to get a feel for the game (though no mention of the microtransactions make me wonder how many hours have been put in).

The only valid reason I see for wanting a score promptly is to make a statement to the publisher that it's not acceptable to release a game in this state. I've heard, however, that some issues disappear if you reboot your Switch after installing (not sleep mode, hard reboot). Worth a shot...?

Personally I'm not sure if leeway should be given or not to any games upon release. Some sites write "advanced previews" and just don't call it reviews and seem to get away with this kind of thing (stating they need more playtime or such, which may or may not be true). I guess calling it a review sets the expectation for a score much higher though. Not sure what I'd have done... probably have two scores on "my" site, one gameplay score and one overall score and short one-line explanations. For NBA 2k18 the score could be 9 for gameplay and 3 overall.

@scully1888 I think this is a really bad precedent to be setting. If a company is asking for money for a broken game then there should be no question about scoring it accordingly. I read the review and it's obviously a low scoring game, but I don't think a reviewer should be worrying about the metacritic score of a game. It should be more about giving a fair rating for readers to be informed. Assuming all sites did this and metacritic didn't show a low score then people may buy it not realising how bad a shape its in. Just my 2 cents.

@PtM this type of game strictly speaking doesn't appeal to me, nor would I be limited to Switch as a platform on which to play. You know my comments had nothing to do with whether or not consumers should feel a need to purchase or make a habit of embracing buggy titles.

I would prefer to take the wait and see approach as advocated here [on Nintendo Life] perhaps the game will improve suitably. Otherwise, equally likely, a new review will be posted to reflect the poor quality of the overall package.

@victimOfNirvana I agree. The Microtransactions seem to be extremely invasive in this game!And the site that gave it a 3/10 score got pressured by 2K to remove the score, as it looked bad on Metacritic and hurt their bottomline!

2K have become a terrible publisher, joining the greed ranks of Activision and Ubisoft!

@Tibob Absolutely not. I have had no contact from 2K regarding this review. I've never changed a review score under pressure from a publisher in 11 and a half years doing this and I'm not about to change that now.

@scully1888 Then why I haven't you put up a score yet almost a week later?
There is no patch in sight and no further communication from 2K whatsoever! All the while the XBOne and PS4 were immediately hot-fixed within a day!
It seems their PR team, however, is more busy hunting down bad reviews than anything else. /shrug

And, more importantly, you really should be upfront with the horrible micro-transactions in this game and how invasive they are!
If large review sites are not willing to confront publishers with this and call them out in their reviews, then it will only become worse and worse over time. Which it already is.
It is absolutely disgusting how you pay FULL price for a game and still being nickle and dimed through the whole game with micro-transactions and that entire games these days are completely designed around them to "encourage" people to spend more money on a game they already paid FULL price for!

@Jeronan With the greatest of respect, I and the NL team are deciding amongst ourselves what to do next and when/how to score it. I can appreciate it's annoying but at the same time – as I've already said above – there are 1800 words in that review that inform the reader about the good and bad elements of the game. The score is coming, but until it does it's not as if my opinion is in limbo: it's been there for nearly a week now, for you to read, and it gives you far more detail than a number does.

@scully1888 With all due respect. You evade the second part of my post!

Again. You don't mention anything about the invasive Micro-transactions in this game and how this game is entirely designed around it to continuously gauge players to pony up more money, while playing.
They made it extremely difficult to earn currency in the game, all so people are pushed to open their wallets instead!

These kind of horrible practices you expect from the typical Free 2 Play games on Mobile phones, but not from a AAA game that already charges you FULL price upfront for the game!

@scully1888 I'm sorry, but even if @Jeronan and everyone else here were wrong that you are too forgiving with 2k by not putting a score for this game, your complete lack of mention of the microtransactions in this game is suspicious at best. And simply ignoring this thing in the comments does not help. Please, clarify this situation for us because I don't want to lose my trust in NintendoLife-- there are way too many websites that praise to heavens everything Nintendo and this wasn't one of them until now.

@victimOfNirvana I'm sorry, but this is getting silly now. I really object to your insinuation that my review is "suspicious at best", because that's calling my professionalism into question.

Could I have focused more on the microtransactions in the game? Sure, that's a fair comment. Being a human being and not an android, sometimes I neglect to note something in a review that could be of importance to some.

However, in my defence, this VC situation in NBA 2K18 is in no way a new one: as someone who knows the series quite well (which is why I was asked to review it), rather than someone keen to just jump on a controversy bandwagon looking for blood, I'm aware that VC has been in the game in this exact 'pay to speed up stat grinding' form since 2K13. In my eyes this isn't a shocking new development, it's been the foundation of the mode for half a decade now. Chances are I didn't mention it because I was looking for new features, and this is in no way a new feature.

Granted, now that it has a new audience of Nintendo fans I could have done a better job in letting newcomers know what the deal is but, again, that's on me. It's not "suspicious at best".

Ultimately, the ironic thing is that by addressing the situation in this way – making insinuations and casting aspersions – you're actually putting more pressure on me about the score than 2K has (which, as I mentioned above, was not at all).

If we were to give the game an 8 now – which is the score I'd give a fully working version of the game – I have no doubt that you'd claim we were bowing to the pressure of 2K. However, if we now give the game a low score because there's still no patch in sight, others could now claim we've done it because we were bowing to the pressure of people like you calling our credibility into question, not because we actually want to.

Both are complete nonsense: I've been discussing our next steps and the timing of the score with Damien away from any of this nonsense. But the difference is that while there's absolutely no evidence of pressure from 2K to give a high score (because there is none), this comments section shows plenty of evidence of pressure from some readers to give a low score.

We (and most notably as the reviewer, I) wouldn't bow to pressure from 2K if it had existed, and we/I won't bow to pressure from readers looking for blood either. With the greatest of respect, when we score the game it'll be our own decision, and accusations that our work is "suspicious at best" really aren't helping speed up that process.

In short, the Da Vinci Code stuff is getting a bit daft now: please let us get on with it and score it accordingly instead of leaping to completely unfounded conclusions that the Illuminati are breathing down our necks.

I think I've addressed your comments far more than a freelancer would be expected to, to be fair, and I'd hope that the points I've made above clarify the situation fairly definitively rather than leading to another "but what about" response.

@scully1888 As a reviewer it is important to keep bringing up the Micro-transaction plague that is infesting gaming more and more!

It's all the more important now, since publishers keep pushing the boundaries and see how far they can keep pushing it through our throats!

NBA2K18 is already one of the more expensive games to buy at the moment, pushing the base price to over 65 bucks now.
And then, as player being constantly pestered by Micro transactions is insulting! Especially since they have made it significantly more difficult to earn VC in this year's iteration!

So when it comes to NBA2K18, they have pushed the VC too far now and crossed a red line, where the VC starts to become very intrusive in the gameplay.
Hence, why some of the reviewers have been very critical and reflected that, rightfully so, in their scores.

@scully1888 Please, don't put words into my mouth. I haven't once mentioned the score of the review. You could've given it a 10/10 for all I care (wouldn't be much different from other gaming websites). The only problem I have is that you haven't mentioned the microtransactions AT ALL, not even to say they are bearable. If I had bought the game based on your review (technical issues aside), as someone who never played them before (which I believe is the same situation as many Nintendo platform owners), when I got home and found out that I have just payed $60 for a glorified F2P game, I'd be pissed at you. I would completely, honestly, put your professionalism into question, and I'd be lying here if I said I wouldn't. The unscored review only adds salt to the injury.

As a gamer, even if you don't personally care, you certainly know how much microtransactions, especially the pay-to-win kind are hated on the community. As a professional gaming reviewer, failing to mention them at all, coupled with the unscored review... well, you get what I'm calling a suspicious situation. You can say all you want that what you choose to put in the review is your call, and that's okay, but then you'll also get to hear people say what they think of the omission.

@scully1888 I actually was pretty surprised you dinged it the way you did. I was happy these issues have gotten some attention because by and large they've been ignored on most other sites. I do feel the Micro-Transactions are especially egregious this year as they made it almost impossible to progress without them, whereas in years past they were less intrusive. However, the real issue is that this game is in a broken state right now on the Switch, and you've given ample attention to that in your review.

Don't be so hard on NintendoLife people. On metacritic there are only 4 sites that had the guts to issue a score for the game. My guess is everyone is waiting to justify scoring the game at least 8/10.

@theberrage That is sthe problem. I expected more from Nintendo Life. I come here because the team was always trustworthy. Even when Nintendo's own games suck, they don't sugarcoat it. Not scoring the game + not mentioning the microtransactions was not at all what I was expecting.

Right now the game has technical difficulties. Though released, it's not a finished product. That's just the world we live and we might want to accept that. I think it would be unfair to tell the world this game is a 4/10, because next week it could be a 9/10. But many would have already moved on and would miss out on a great experience.

The staff at Nintendo Life loves gaming, no question about it. They have a responsibility to treat the industry fairly because they respect it and love it. I'm also sure that, as gamers, they are also frustrated that 2K has released a broken product.

That said, i think it might be good to appease everyone if they could give a range of scores for these situations. It's not the first time this has happened and won't be the last. They can say, "right now, this game is playing like X but we feel a patch can make it play like a X."

I'd also be interested in an editorial where they can give an opinion on releasing games like this (if they haven't already).

On another note, the only other time I can remember questioning a NL review was NBA 2K13 for Wii U. That game sukt !

Why has this still not been given a score? You said a few days. It’s now totally clear that 2K have asked you to hold off a score. It’s ridiculous to not give a game a score because it’s a broken mess. The job of a reviewer is to review games as they are whilst reviewing them, not a few months down the road... 2K already got a low scoring review taken down, only for it to be put back up after a public backlash, so it’s clear what’s going on here, Nintendo Life don’t want to be black listed.

I am afraid my comment might be thrown in with some of the others in here complaining and moaning, but I am not out for blood, I'd just like to point out it was said a review score would only be held off for a 'few days at most'. It has now been 9 days. I know it is a tricky situation for the NL staff, but I think it is quite simple: are the issues fixed? If yes, put the score of 8 up. If not, isn't it high time to post a lower score?

There are people who bought this game over a week ago and are still unable to play it properly. This is not really acceptable from a developer. I will certainly be skipping this year's entry as a result.

That score should be up there by now, shouldn't it ? I mean it's not like 2K had issued a release date for the patch or anything. It's supposed to be coming "soon" which means nothing and everything.

Also there could be a high road out by giving those who bought the broken game a bunch of that so precious VC, but I didn't ear anything along that line. Actually was there even a "sorry" by 2K ? Or do they feel like everything is fine here ?

I have the game since the first day. I trully i'm a little disapointed with mycareer mode, the cutcenes are terrible with dock mode or handled mode. But with that i start to play MyGm or MyLeague and i found a trully good sport game. In game is very fluid and a really good experience. About VC? You need that to my career but for MyGM or MyLeague you don't need to carry about that.
Of course i want to play MyCarrer and i will wait for a patch to fix that cutcenes problems.
But in the end you don't need a story to play a good sports game...So for me it's not a perfect game but it's a perfect experience.

Two weeks later, still no score, after we were told "a few days at most." Sorry NL, two weeks is a lot more than "a few days". That's too long, you lost some respect with this one.

When you take two weeks to put a score up after promising one sooner, in combination with the news regarding 2K and The Sixth Axis, it doesn't look good. Note I am not saying anything happened at all between reviewer and publisher here, I am clearly saying it doesn't look good, it leaves room for doubt.

The worst thing 2K could do is withhold future review copies of games, and frankly I prefer journalistic integrity, I dislike the way publishers manipulate the critic industry. You may quickly say that my comments aren't reflecting the case, and I leave room for that, I am simply pointing out how it looks.

It's very clear that either of two things happened here: Nintendo Life doesn't want to be that publication who scared third parties away after they finally came back OR Nintendo Life was kindly asked to not put a score until a patch releases, which they were told would be soon but clearly not soon enough.

Putting those things ahead of actually scoring a game correctly is worrying.

Why should publishers be able to pressure sites into that sort of behaviour? It's ridiculous. Don't want a bad score? Make a better game.

And scare third parties away? The third parties who make such broken (and pay-to-win!) games shouldn't be welcomed anyway. We don't want crap third party efforts on the Switch, we want quality. EA managed to make a pretty decent FIFA. If EA, a company twice awarded "worst company in America", can do it, so could 2K. And 2K should be called out on it!

Even if all of our speculation is completely incorrect, and yes there is a written review right there, the bottom line is that NL promised the readers a score within a few days and then didn't keep that promise, and that does damage the trust; it adds doubt, makes you wonder just how much of this or future reviews are honest or not. What a shame.

It has been three weeks now and no patch! It's time to call 2K out and score the game accordingly to the terrible state it's in.
It's pretty obvious the Switch version was just an afterthought for 2K and them not being in any hurry fixing this mess of a game.

They're probably too busy fixing the Virtual Currency system for players on other platforms from whom their game has quite literally been stealing money. They could get into serious trouble for that, so that's where their priority lies currently.

Seriously, 2K can go jump. This isn't the sort of third-party "support" this Switch player wants. Unlike its competitors, Nintendo doesn't need garbage like this on their platform to succeed.

Why does this get a free pass even though it was buggy and broken at launch? Why does this get a second chance to salvage a more marketable score while every other title gets ripped to shreds? I don't doubt your assertion that the game in its current state is fine now, but it's unjust and unfair to everybody else who has made the effort to release a complete and relatively issue-free game at launch.

The fact that the retail release is unplayable without a mandatory 17GB download (on a portable device no less, where external storage can quickly add a substantial amount to the overall cost of the game) is also a deal-breaker, and is much, much worse than a few insignficant and inconsequential missing features as far as I'm concerned.

I hear great things about this game from Switch owners. Great that this reflects to the score given. Too bad for anyone else that is moaning for every little bit and is not positive enough to enjoy this game.

@sillygostly In my opinion all reviews should be done like this in this day and age. With the ability to update a game and change it to fulfill the needs of its players, a changing game should have a changing review. A reviews purpose is to give knowledge of your experience of the game, to help readers form an opinion of the game. There's no point in leaving it at "this game is 2/10" when the game when you reviewed it is totally different from current circumstances.

Deserves a 3/10. Game was broken at launch and still has bugs. I'll be ignoring this game.

I doubt they've managed to print all the physical copies with this massive patch which means in 2 decades time this game will return to being an unplayable mess with no patching available. Once upon a time you couldn't patch poor games.

Why 2k didn't delay release I will never know. They could have avoided this mess.

I love this site but it's lost a lot of credibility as a site for reputable reviews. I've mentioned numerous times that it's usually 10% above the general average. I could say a lot more but I think most sensible people can see what's going on here, not just this review.

One of the things I love about this site is how generally positive they are compared to others... but this was a case where I was hoping they'd call EA out on their BS with a low score. Between the unreasonably expensive pricing model, the ridiculous data storage requirements and the glitches that made it unplayable for weeks before finally being patched, I don't even care if the game itself is fun. EA can't treat consumers like this.

As for my own thoughts, the game should be judged on its release, not three weeks afterward where you allow the developers to take their merry old time to fix a game which was already broken at launch. I hate scores, especially in this case considering how the game has (had) a lot of bugs and is terrible with the microtransactions (admittedly in my opinion) and still gets an 8/10, though it is based on the reviewer's opinion, so I can't criticize too harshly there. Still, a bit surprising and too 'nice' in my opinion once again.

@Shiryu To be honest, I do also raise a brow now and then regarding the in-game-purchases of some games, specially mobile ones. I was surprised to read that most of the income for several mobile games come from a very tiny perentage of gamers. Some of them usually spending 500+ a month on said games.

In the other hands, games like this one and specially GTA use a lot of currency, but you can get by easily without spending a dime (besides the cost of the game): my son has been playing GTA V (with me riding shotgun) for 24 months and there is no sign of running out of things to do. I'm surprise. SO, if this special edition allows me to play 2x or even 3x the usual length of teh game, I'm in.

@scully1888Thank you! I'm glad they boxed out the bugs. I'm then keeping my preorder. Ignore those who think you should score the game as it was on launch. There was no rule that it says you should do so as the game was not intended to be like that on launch. The gameplay is the same as it was, but now with bugs ironed out.

@SLIGEACH_EIRE I'm getting very bored of you insinuating underhandedness every time I write a review for this site. If you don't like the method I use, that's fine, but pack it in with the constant not-so-subtle suggestions that there are dodgy deals going on. It's getting beyond a joke now and I won't have my credibility called into disrepute like that.

I was asked to review the game by Nintendo Life, I wasn't comfortable giving it a score in that state, I wanted to wait and see if it was going to be patched before the physical launch, it was, an updated review with a final score was therefore published.

I don't care if you think "sensible people can see what's going on": those are the facts and if you can't accept that then it's something you're going to have to come to terms with, not me or any of the other Nintendo Life guys.

@scully1888 I for one heavily agree with the way you've handled this review as of now. I do disagree with you not scoring it right away though, since they were of course, happy to take people's money for it. I don't see why you shouldn't let people know what to expect from it, including an overall score. HOWEVER, I'm very happy you updated the review once the updates were sent out. What's the point of a review of the game, if it is not relevant to what they would be purchasing at the current time is what I say. So by updating it, you did a service to those who were not aware of the increase in quality of the game +1.

@SLIGEACH_EIRE When you give a game a 7 score, and others give it an 8 score, it doesn't mean that you're right, and others are wrong. If you disagree with a review, state your reasons. Simply saying that the score is too high isn't a reason. It's just your opinion.

It sounds like it's a good game. And with that said, I won't buy it at full price, as a personal protest against the game being release in such a state. I picked up FIFA day one, and while I regret that the presentation is lacking, the game is fully playable and fun. I can't say the day with what I have heard and seen of 2k day one.

The sad part? I have bought the current 2k for my PS4 the last 2 Black Fridays at a considerable doscount($30 each time). I was going to indulge for the switch, but if the Switch version is full price, as I fully expect it to be, and the PS4 version is at half off for Black Friday, as I expect it to be....

I find it funny seeing some folks on here saying the game was a buggy, broken, unplayable mess and they'll stay far away. like @Kobeskillz said it was fun and playable before the patch, it just made it better. Don't get me wrong the game has it's problems like the save file size and, ugh, microtransactions, but to say it was unplayable is just ridiculous

I preordered the physical game and I am still getting it. What other regular basketball game you can play on the go. For those that mention FIFA over .NBA, at least NBA have all their modes on the switch unlike fifa

The fact that nintendolife rarely rates games weeks after they receive patches makes this review dubious at best. If 2K18 is given special treatment then I expect nintendolife to give the same courtesy to every other game that is released with tons of bugs & glitches at launch. It's only fair.

@Incarta or YOU could buy it on a cheaper and better console without having to rely on remote play (up to 1.5 Gb per hour at 540p) or to see the game gather dust in the backlog. Just admit that not everyone has a sufficiently generous schedule to sit before a TV or computer screen for meaningful periods of time. XD And speaking seriously, the article highlighted enough merits in the game to give it a second chance. Years ago, the bugs and issues would have crippled numerous copies past the point of no return; the Patch Age we're living in now is both a curse AND a blessing in that context - and "merciless judgement" won't make this age end when it thrives in "cheaper and better versions" on the very "other consoles" you mention.

if I wanted to buy this game now, then I want to know how good the game is NOW and not how it was at release. I like this updated review for that reason.

I also don't see what the huge problem with giving the game no score is. The review exists to inform people of the current state of the game and it did the job even without a score! Arguably even better because of that since, of you see the no score, you will more likely read what is going on!

I am btw. very tired about us making a basically political issue out of everything. Apparently now NintendoLife just wants to protect the large publishers, Reggie is just lying about everything even though there has never been evidence in most cases not even a solid motive, we apparently have to buy 3rd party to make a statement to the publishers, DLC are a scam all the time because of course the content would have been in the game without extra cost otherwise...
How about we stop talking that much about ridiculous assumptions and talk more about the games themselves again?

And yes, I am well aware that you shouldn't always trust companys, but that doesn't mean you have to fully expect everything to be some kind of scam either!

I had cancelled my order while waiting to see if they patched it. And they did! And not only that, they've got another patch with fine tuning and added content on the way.

I reinstated my preorder, only $37.99 at BestBuy with GCU- this game qualifies for an additional $10 off beyond the $47.99 discounted price.

Btw, reading some of the comments here, it's glaringly obvious people thrive off of trashing games and seeing "punitive judgement" executed. People love that stuff nowadays. Nothing brings them joy like seeing a game crash and burn, and you can just see people losing their composure now that they realize this game won't be crashing and burning.

There is no way that this game is worth an 8 from what i have played. Its a free to play game with assets pulled from the past. The gameplay is good when you get it but based on a grind intended to fleece you for more money.

With the emphasis on the Tiny Barbarian review being on quality for money Im not sure why these microtransacrions get a free pass here.

Whilst I don't mind making updated reviews once patches have come in, I would have put in an original score after a few days or a week max had passed since release.

This was a review of a product, when the review first went up it should have been reviewed based on its current state. By all means state that it may be updated to give people the chance to wait if they so wish but I don't feel too comfortable of witholding judgement for 2K to take their time fixing issues that shouldn't have been there in the first place.

If anything the release should have been delayed, not the review. I respect the author's decision but I do hope this doesn't set a precedent for the future.

Besides, after seeing all the Microtransaction and VC malarky so far, I'd have trouble giving it any more than a 6-7.

Get over the wee number at the end of the review, the content of the review will tell you everything you needed to know about the state of the game at launch, and how it stands up now. As it stands, it's now a quality, recommended game for Nintendo Switch owners. Good job @scully1888

@kobashi100 Your right about scores. I would hapily see then removed. People fixate on then to much.

However the review barely mentions the microtransactions nor how career has been crippled to add them in. What purpose do they have? Just refers to it as a grind. Was that grind worthwile or was it there to tempt payment? Reading through comments makes me feel like there was no mention of them in initial review at all.

Glad to see this game finally got fixed. Also, maybe these controversial articles that inspire a lot of heated debate will inspire NintendoLife to change the nonsensical sort order of their comment section.

The reviewer made it clear that in its previous state he could not recommend the game and rightly so held off on giving a score until the patch, which was required also on the PS4 and Xbox one was released. I believe he did this as having invested time in the game he could see it's real potential and that once patched it would fulfil that potential. It would therefore be unfair to slate it without the chance to judge after the patch and it's clear there are no underhand issues at play. I would say he may have expected the patch to arrive sooner.

I bought the game regardless and the only issue I had was the occasional cut scene audio sync glitch. The basketball itself was sublime and problem free and the game looks and played brilliant on the Switch.

Regarding the microtransactions, the whole idea behind my career is to take a rookie, improve him and finally start a game. This was my first NBA game (I even had to google the rules of basketball much to my shame ) I've found the rate of progression enjoyable and it's helped me learn the game and become more skilled than if I was handed the abilities on a plate, I feel I've earned them.

Anyway great review, fair score. But then take my comments with a pinch of salt as what would I know, as I only bought and played the game and therfore cannot possibly know as much as some of the commentators here who haven't........

As a quick edit, I looked at my switch profile and NBA 2k18 is showing over 50hours played. Not bad for a "broken" game.

I'm surprised but not surprised at the level of emphasis that gets placed on a review score number. The original review basically said the game was broken trash and not to buy it, but that somehow gets read as getting a "free pass" and the lack of a final score (until recently) must mean that Nintendo Life and this reviewer must have gotten secret kickbacks.

Is this Nintendo Life or The X-Files? I fully didn't expect all the seething anger and accusations I've read in the comments.

It's a double edged sword. Should publishers get ridiculed for releasing buggy-broken games? Yes. But does a game deserve to get a fair shot at selling after it gets patched? Hell yes.

This reminds me of the Assassin's Creed Unity situation. It was one of the first games to ever have a review embargo, and it was a glitchfest (at least for PC) upon release. I bought the game 2 months after it was patched and it still stands as my favorite Assassin's Creed game till this day. It's got, hands down, the deepest customization and combat systems in the series and the only game to feature a great co-op mode. But despite the free Dead Kings DLC (great DLC btw) that was given to fans as a result of the botched release, Unity was never able to rise above the negative stigma it received due to the negative press.

So, kickbacks or not: I give Nintendolife credit for holding back its score of the game 'til a patched was released. 3rd parties bringing popular IPs to the first time to a Nintendo system in years don't need the additional negative press. Negative press can have long lasting effects on a game's reputation far beyond the time it took to get its game breaking issues resolved. A game doesn't deserve to suffer solely because of the marketing/promotion pressures exercised by the publisher. Developers gotta eat and deserved too, especially when they work around the clock on patches.

If they fix the game, then they do deserve the money. Publishers should take Q&A a little more seriously before release but games deserve to sell if they're eventually patched within a reasonable amount of time.

this game is awesome...and i dint even mind it when it was first released...only the My Career was buggy (and only in the cut scenes) and a little audio glitches. i'm more than happy with my purchase. this game looks amazing on switch and now plays even better with the incoming patches. a huge robust single player and multiplayer experience. the game is awesome and deserves the 8/10.

@scully1888 Chris, the guy is despised by many people who frequent these comment sections. Don't take it personally man, he likes to be the first to comment on everything and it's usually a negative opinion. Apparently it's called "not being a blind fanboy" but I like to think of it as having a chip on his shoulder.

@scully1888 I completely disagree with the way you went about this. As a reviewer, you need to review what's there, not what may or may not be there in the future. Barring online heavy games, a pending score shouldn't be used. This review has a huge double standard. Because how many other games are you going to give this special treatment to? Are you going to rereview Blaster Master Zero or Splatoon 2 because the game has been updated? I doubt it.

One thing that I think a lot of people are missing is that it sounds like - and @scully1888 can correct me if I am wrong - the decision to withhold a final score was not just the reviewer's but the editorial board as a whole. But yet, the reviewer seems to be getting most of the heat and insinuations.

It's just a video game score, people. I'm still surprised people have gotten so worked up about it. I wonder how many of these people actually bought the game, as opposed to how many had their minds made up going into it and just jumped on the bandwagon of hate. Some people complaining and saying there are obvious kickbacks don't even own a Switch to play the game on, but yet have strong enough opinions to make thinly veiled accusations. I bought it upon release on the eShop and have enjoyed it, and its better now with the patch. The practice of not scoring a game is common for those in which an online component needs to be tried and graded, and it is extremely rare in other situations like this one.

It was just a decision made by the team. It bothers me that people are so quick to jump to accusations without any proof, evidence or history of occurance to back them up.

@flapjack-ashley I feel like there should be two scores in cases like this. The initial score of what's initially there content and quality wise and then a reevaluated score once a Patch is released. That would go over better wouldn't it?

professional critics are embarrassing themselves in regard to this game — minus jim sterling, who, granted, is in a privileged position. a gap of 63 points between metascore and user score for a game that isn't even being metabombed for being exclusive — that's something every consumer should look closely at.

Its a great game and if you like basketball you should give it a go, in its current state its an excellent game with all the features, unlike FIFA, 2K made an good effort with all features and EA were lazy.

@feelinsupersonic since when was the user score accurate? People can hate or inflate an average score with bias either way. Just look at all the anti-Nintendo scores on Zelda. Rating it 0 purely out of spite.

I could rate this 100 on Metacritic and get a bunch of friends to do the same, to try and up the average.

@Baker1000 as i said, breath of the wild was indeed metabombed for being exclusive — as was horizon: zero dawn. because 2k18 is on all platforms, the raging platform fanboys have no reason to do that. now, if you want a truly great sample provided by people who had to buy the game to be able to review it, you can just go to steam. it would take you and your 10,000 friends $ 600,000 to make an impact over there.